Casey v. United States
Petition for certiorari denied on June 25, 2018
Issue: Whether a court may grant a federal habeas petition collaterally challenging a sentence under Johnson v. United States, which held that a sentence enhanced under the “residual clause” of the Armed Career Criminal Act violated the Due Process Clause, when the sentencing judge never specified—and therefore the record is silent on—whether the petitioner’s original sentence was enhanced pursuant to the ACCA’s now-invalidated residual clause.
| Date | Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding) |
|---|
| Mar 08 2018 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 9, 2018) |
| Apr 05 2018 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 9, 2018 to May 9, 2018, submitted to The Clerk. |
| Apr 06 2018 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 9, 2018 |
| Apr 16 2018 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 9, 2018 to May 25, 2018, submitted to The Clerk. |
| Apr 17 2018 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including May 25, 2018. |
| May 22 2018 | Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed. |
| Jun 04 2018 | Reply of petitioner Charles H. Casey, Jr. filed. |
| Jun 05 2018 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/21/2018. |
| Jun 25 2018 | Petition DENIED. |
